Comments on: How to Implement EHRs (if at all) http://ushealthcrisis.com/2009/01/how-to-implement-ehrs-if-at-all/ Survival Strategies Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:54:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: kflanagan http://ushealthcrisis.com/2009/01/how-to-implement-ehrs-if-at-all/comment-page-1/#comment-635 kflanagan Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:43:12 +0000 http://ushealthcrisis.com/?p=87#comment-635 In a related post and comment.<br><br><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway/are-electronic-health-rec_b_159823.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway...</a><br><br>I see standards as key, and Fed Govt as the one to manage standards, then once in place hold providers to them with both carrots and sticks.<br><br>As ravisohal mentions, PACs and RIS exist, I worked for a Hospital in the mid 90's we had PACs then, surely it's been around long enough that we should have standards in place.<br><br>Interoperability in the medical software field has never been great, I think that's one of the key problems with adoption. Clearly there are other important reasons, but I think that the ability to achieve relatively straight forward interoperability will help make these others lower barriers. In a related post and comment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway…

I see standards as key, and Fed Govt as the one to manage standards, then once in place hold providers to them with both carrots and sticks.

As ravisohal mentions, PACs and RIS exist, I worked for a Hospital in the mid 90's we had PACs then, surely it's been around long enough that we should have standards in place.

Interoperability in the medical software field has never been great, I think that's one of the key problems with adoption. Clearly there are other important reasons, but I think that the ability to achieve relatively straight forward interoperability will help make these others lower barriers.

]]> By: kflanagan http://ushealthcrisis.com/2009/01/how-to-implement-ehrs-if-at-all/comment-page-1/#comment-23 kflanagan Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:43:12 +0000 http://ushealthcrisis.com/?p=87#comment-23 In a related post and comment.<br><br><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway/are-electronic-health-rec_b_159823.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway...</a><br><br>I see standards as key, and Fed Govt as the one to manage standards, then once in place hold providers to them with both carrots and sticks.<br><br>As ravisohal mentions, PACs and RIS exist, I worked for a Hospital in the mid 90's we had PACs then, surely it's been around long enough that we should have standards in place.<br><br>Interoperability in the medical software field has never been great, I think that's one of the key problems with adoption. Clearly there are other important reasons, but I think that the ability to achieve relatively straight forward interoperability will help make these others lower barriers. In a related post and comment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francine-hardaway…

I see standards as key, and Fed Govt as the one to manage standards, then once in place hold providers to them with both carrots and sticks.

As ravisohal mentions, PACs and RIS exist, I worked for a Hospital in the mid 90's we had PACs then, surely it's been around long enough that we should have standards in place.

Interoperability in the medical software field has never been great, I think that's one of the key problems with adoption. Clearly there are other important reasons, but I think that the ability to achieve relatively straight forward interoperability will help make these others lower barriers.

]]> By: ravisohal http://ushealthcrisis.com/2009/01/how-to-implement-ehrs-if-at-all/comment-page-1/#comment-20 ravisohal Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:48:26 +0000 http://ushealthcrisis.com/?p=87#comment-20 Francine, I'll second your thoughts on EMR adoption. If you give the software away for free, doctors still won't adopt in great numbers. As you've pointed out many doctors can't see the ROI on EMRs. I think the key thing to understand is that ROI for doctors and proponents of EMR adoption are not symmetric. Doctors need to clearly see and understand how EMR will positively impact their bottom line. Unfortunately "efficiency" and "less mistakes" are not concrete enough financial outcomes for their practices. <br><br>Interestingly enough, Radiology practices are rapidly adopting their own versions of EMRs (RIS - Radiology Information Systems) and PACs (Picture Archiving and Communication Systems). There is a clear financial ROI -- when doctors have access to their patients' MRIs, CT scans, and reports, the refer more cases to the Radiology practice. Francine, I'll second your thoughts on EMR adoption. If you give the software away for free, doctors still won't adopt in great numbers. As you've pointed out many doctors can't see the ROI on EMRs. I think the key thing to understand is that ROI for doctors and proponents of EMR adoption are not symmetric. Doctors need to clearly see and understand how EMR will positively impact their bottom line. Unfortunately “efficiency” and “less mistakes” are not concrete enough financial outcomes for their practices.

Interestingly enough, Radiology practices are rapidly adopting their own versions of EMRs (RIS – Radiology Information Systems) and PACs (Picture Archiving and Communication Systems). There is a clear financial ROI — when doctors have access to their patients' MRIs, CT scans, and reports, the refer more cases to the Radiology practice.

]]>